And Also: For readers of the NYT editorial page today, I suggest having a vomit pail nearby. There is David "Republican Shill" Brooks with a piece entitled "The Prosecutor's Diagnosis: No Cancer Found" (malpractice!). And, there is Nicholas "Democratic Republican Apologist" Kristoff shilling for the Bush Administration while continuing his "rational Democrat" act.
Kristoff, who Wilson helped out respecting a Niger trip column, is more disgusting (such is the emotion that comes to mind) given his "hey, I'm just being rational here" approach. He admits calling Fitzgerald "Inspector Javert" was wrong, and the column is a plea for Cheney to come clean. Now, it's not that he's clearly guilty. Nooo. There might be "an innocent explanation" though "they never raised the issue with [him]." But, you know, it all looks so bad, you know?
Anyway, they really shouldn't go after Rove, if they don't have the evidence. And, the Dems should cut short the "glee" since the indictment is humiliating to the country and all. [Brooks spins a tale of paranoia and specters] Cut the shit, Nick. I listened to Air America, filled with people who basically hate these guys. "Glee" is not exactly how I would describe it (some glee earlier in the week). More somewhat grim "I told you so," "they [you know, Kristoff and Brooks] are still trying to say it is all nothing much," and "maybe, just maybe, people will get what we have been crying out about for so long."
At any rate, should one not be somewhat happy some justice has been done? Seems like that should be worthy of some happiness, huh? Or, that people who quite well deserve it was weakened a bit more. But, so sorry, Nick ... how gauche of me. Frank Rich's column is opposite these shills. I wonder how he can stomach being in the same paper as them.
---
Guarded optimism about the indictments. The special prosecutor came off as a hard working and upright civil servant, down to earth and ethical in his dealings. Fitzgerald did a good job spelling out the indictments -- perjury and obstruction of justice, using a throwing dirt on an umpire that clouds his judgment metaphor that many liked. He also repeatedly (if gentlemanly) refused to answer things not in the "four corners of the indictment," staying loyal to secrecy rules. Many things are still unclear, including the identity of at least one mystery person, but many things are pretty crystal clear.
Fitzgerald recently rented offices in D.C. for two more years, so even if the investigation is "substantially" completed, hopefully his promise that he "will not end the investigation until I can look anyone in the eye and tell them that we have carried out our responsibility" is completely upheld. This is so because, honestly, this is not enough. Libby -- surely a prime catch as both the chief advisor of the Vice President and advisor to the President himself -- is not enough. This is not enough, since it has "designated scapegoat" written all over it. Personally, Karl Rove (even if he's still under investigation) free is galling.
And, the substantive crime -- outing of the agent and spreading the information around -- is not targeted. The matter is addressed though, and as a Washington Post review of the background events (not quite as damning as a recent Los Angeles Times account, but damning enough) suggests, enough is there to show just how wrong the administration has been:
Defending the war became the animating priority aboard Air Force Two that day. According to his indictment on Friday, Libby "discussed with other officials aboard the plane" how he should respond to "pending media inquiries" about the critic, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. Apart from Libby, only press aide Catherine Martin is known to have accompanied Cheney on that flight. ...
One notable disclosure is that Libby and Cheney made separate inquiries to the CIA about Wilson's wife, and each confirmed independently that she worked there. It was Cheney, the indictment states, who supplied Libby the detail "that Wilson's wife worked . . . in the Counterproliferation Division" -- an unambiguous declaration that her position was among the case officers of the operations directorate. That conversation took place on June 12, 2003, a month before the Norfolk flight and nearly two weeks before Libby first told a reporter about Plame's CIA affiliation.
The article details various times Libby (and Rove*) talked about and spread the Wilson/Plame story. This tidbit suggests that Cheney was part of the conspiracy, especially since the two are joined at the hip. Rove and his lawyer ran around all last week trying to get out of being charged ... did he supply some information that would clarify such things? Anyway, an important piece of the puzzle was why Wilson was person non grata. He dared to (after trying to go through channels) publicly expose the false Niger uranium claims. Talking Points Memo (you can get the indictment etc. as well over there) is all over this. WP suggests the irony as well as the importance of the matter:
The uranium claims had never been significant to career analysts -- Iraq had plenty already and lacked the means to enrich it. But the allegations proved irresistible to the White House Iraq Group, which devised the war's communications strategy and included Libby among its members. Every layman understood the connection between uranium and the bomb, participants in the group said in interviews at the time, and it was the easiest way for the Bush administration to raise alarms. ...
By summer 2002, the White House Iraq Group assigned Communications Director James R. Wilkinson to prepare a white paper for public release, describing the "grave and gathering danger" of Iraq's allegedly "reconstituted" nuclear weapons program. Wilkinson gave prominent place to the claim that Iraq "sought uranium oxide, an essential ingredient in the enrichment process, from Africa." That claim, along with repeated use of the "mushroom cloud" image by top officials beginning in September, became the emotional heart of the case against Iraq.
As is usually the case, you cannot look at this thing as but a single act. It is quite literally an overall conspiracy, surely in actuality, even if one will have problems making a criminal case. One, as the article notes, some writers (including at The Nation) and even the likes of Sen. Charles E. Schumer knew was troubling JULY 2003. You know, two freakening years ago. But, as with top Republican inhouse critics of the war, there was a lonnngggg delay before something was done. And an election.
It is nice, given who is in power, that one of the many honorable people in government came out and showed us that something is being done to investigate and even go after these people. As with DeLay, the top procurement officer (well, until recently) at the White House, Frist, and those not targeted for criminal offenses, but just disposed of one way or the other (Brownie, Miers), something is being done here. Note also how the move to use Katrina to cut prevailing wage rules was also recently blocked. You can grasp on to the victories.
Not enough, surely, but it's something all the same.
---
* The article, in a basically unforgivable move, cites an "administration official" who spoke to one of the paper's reporters, and "veered off the precise matter [they] were discussing" to say that "Wilson's trip was a boondoggle." Who is this person? Sounds a lot like Rove, who did something quite similar when speaking to Matt Cooper ... shifting from I believe some welfare matter to talk about Wilson and his wife.
It's too late in the fucking game to be coy here. Two reporters were threatened with jail, one went to jail, to help the prosecutor make his case. And, they were important, since Libby used reporters as conduits and eventually (falsely) as cover. So, Pincus ... who is the freakening source? If it's not Rove ... is it this mysterious person in the indictment and/or the "nonpartisan" (if we can believe Novak) second source for the infamous article that outed Plame?